Benchmark: window vs Win - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var Win = window;

Tests:

window
window.A = "ABCD";
Win
Win.A = "ABCD";
window 2
window.A = "ABCD";
Win 2
Win.A = "ABCD";

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
window
Win
window 2
Win 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
window	2243121.2 Ops/sec
Win	5677561.0 Ops/sec
window 2	2190210.5 Ops/sec
Win 2	5467802.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its results to understand what's being tested and compared.

**Benchmark Context**

The benchmark is testing two approaches for accessing properties on objects in JavaScript: using `window` (a global object that provides access to various features, including objects) versus using a property named `Win` (created by setting `Win = window;`). The test cases are designed to measure the performance difference between these two approaches.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

1. Using `window` (`window.A = "ABCD";`)
2. Using a custom property `Win` created on the fly (`Win = window; Win.A = "ABCD";`)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Using `window`:**
	* Pros:
		+ Wide adoption and support across browsers.
		+ Familiarity for developers who are accustomed to using `window`.
	* Cons:
		+ May lead to slower performance due to the overhead of accessing the global object.
		+ Can be less efficient in terms of memory usage, as it requires storing the entire window object in memory.
2. **Using a custom property `Win`:**
	* Pros:
		+ Can potentially outperform using `window` due to reduced overhead and better cache locality.
		+ Allows for more fine-grained control over performance-critical code paths.
	* Cons:
		+ Less widely supported across browsers, as it requires explicit configuration of the custom property.
		+ May require additional setup and maintenance to ensure compatibility with different browser versions.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, the `Win` property is created using a simple assignment statement (`Win = window;`). This indicates that no specific library or framework is being used here. However, it's worth noting that some libraries (e.g., React or Angular) may encourage the use of custom properties like `Win` for performance reasons.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

This benchmark does not explicitly test any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's necessary to illustrate the comparison between using `window` and a custom property. If you're interested in exploring other aspects of JavaScript, consider checking out benchmarks that focus on performance-critical topics like async/await, promise-based APIs, or WebAssembly.

**Other Alternatives**

If you'd like to explore alternative approaches for measuring performance in your own JavaScript benchmarks, here are some ideas:

1. **Use a caching library**: Consider using a caching library like LRU Cache or Cache2 to measure the performance of cache-heavy code paths.
2. **Test async/await scenarios**: Create a benchmark that tests the performance of asynchronous code written with async/await syntax.
3. **Explore WebAssembly**: Use WebAssembly (WASM) to create benchmarks that focus on performance, power efficiency, and security aspects.

Feel free to reach out if you have any further questions or would like more information on these alternatives!

Related benchmarks:

window vs Win (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: window vs Win vs window 2 vs Win 2

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

window

Win

window 2

Win 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):